Pregnancy and pregnancy outcomes in a prospective cohort study: Final results from the Nexplanon Observational Risk Assessment Study (NORA)
article
OA: closed
CC0
AI-generated summary
This prospective cohort study of 7364 Nexplanon users found a Pearl Index of 0.02 for during-use pregnancies, indicating high contraceptive effectiveness in real-world settings.
One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works
Abstract
ObjectivesTo monitor pregnancy occurrence and outcomes among Nexplanon users in the United States during standard clinical practice.Study designThe Nexplanon Observational Risk Assessment (NORA) study was a large prospective cohort study conducted in the United States (US). Study participants with a newly inserted Nexplanon implant were recruited by health care professionals (HCPs) who had completed the Nexplanon clinical training. Via a survey, study participants were followed up at 6-month intervals for 36 months and 6 months after implant removal. Reported unintended pregnancies were validated and classified as noninsertion, preinsertion, during-use, or postremoval.ResultsFour hundred and twenty-eight HCPs in 47 states recruited 7364 Nexplanon users. Pregnancies included one noninsertion, eight preinsertion, three during-use, and 14 postremoval pregnancies; of these 26 pregnancies, 22 resulted in the birth of a healthy child, two resulted in an induced abortion, one resulted in a spontaneous abortion, and one resulted in an ectopic pregnancy. Six pregnancies occurred during-use (n = 3) or within 7 days following implant removal (n = 3), yielding a Pearl Index of 0.04 (95% CI, 0.02-0.09).ConclusionsNexplanon is an effective contraceptive in real-world users; the Pearl Index was 0.02 (95% CI, 0.00-0.06) for during-use pregnancies, and 0.04 when including pregnancies that occurred within 7 days following implant removal.ImplicationsThis large real-world-use study indicates that Nexplanon is as effective as shown in the preapproval clinical trials.
My notes (saved in your browser only)
Citation neighborhood (no data yet)
We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.
References (9)
- doi:10.1080/13625180801942754 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0002-9378(12)91812-8 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(98)00015-6 via openalex
- doi:10.1093/biomet/26.4.404 via openalex
- doi:10.3390/ph14060548 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2019.03.052 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2011.09.005 via openalex
- doi:10.1186/1752-1947-8-43 via openalex
- doi:10.1016/j.gyobfe.2005.10.016 via openalex
Source provenance
- openalex
- last seen: 2026-05-11T06:21:44.532445+00:00
- unpaywall
- last seen: 2026-08-13T06:47:16.638238+00:00
License: CC0
· commercial use OK